So Why Isn't Iran Allowed to Have Weapons That We Ourselves Have? And Have Actually Used? Isn't This Hypocrisy?

[TheTexan]

The State wants a monopoly on the use of force.

But everyone, from individuals to sovereign nations, have a natural right to self defense.

When the State infringes on those rights, they have lost the moral high ground and are now operating outside the rule of law.

The law of the jungle.

If they have a self defense right to pursue nukes, then I have a self defense right to stop them from pursuing nukes.

The nature of nukes is that they have unlimited collateral damage that has the ability to turn the entire world to ash.

I have no obligation to let anyone have that kind of destructive power.

 

[69360]

If they have a self defense right to pursue nukes, then I have a self defense right to stop them from pursuing nukes.

The nature of nukes is that they have unlimited collateral damage that has the ability to turn the entire world to ash.

I have no obligation to let anyone have that kind of destructive power.

So any country that builds nukes can have their weapons manufacturing sites bombed at any time and it's fine because its self defense?

Or only the ones you don't like?

You are never putting the nuclear genie back in the jar. The knowledge to build them is out there. So it's actually better and safer for us if countries like Iran have a proven nuke because then the potential for a rouge leader like Netanyahu and Trump to fuck with Iran isn't there anymore because of MAD.

 

[TheTexan]

So any country that builds nukes can have their weapons manufacturing sites bombed at any time and it's fine because its self defense?

Or only the ones you don't like?

Anyone has the right to remove nuclear weapon capabilities from anyone else.

i may not always exercise that right. I may in fact let @PAF keep his nukes because in my calculation it's not worth fighting him over it. But that's my calculation to make.

You are never putting the nuclear genie back in the jar.

Well we better figure out a way. Or we are doomed.

If we can at least slow down proliferation enough to allow humans to survive long enough to extend our civilizations into outer space, that's all we need to do.

After that, have as many nukes as you like.

So it's actually better and safer for us if countries like Iran have a proven nuke because then the potential for a rouge leader like Netanyahu and Trump to fuck with Iran isn't there anymore because of MAD.

I don't care if Israel fucks with Iran. That's not my priority. I don't prioritize Iran's safety. Or Israel's.

I prioritize my safety. And I'm a shitload safer when there's less nukes on this earth.

 

[unknown]

If they have a self defense right to pursue nukes, then I have a self defense right to stop them from pursuing nukes.

The nature of nukes is that they have unlimited collateral damage that has the ability to turn the entire world to ash.

I have no obligation to let anyone have that kind of destructive power.

A State has a right to disarm its citizens and maintain a monopoly on the use of force.

 

[TheTexan]

9/11 was carried out by the Mossad and CIA for the benefit of Izrael.

They could do 900 9/11's and that would be preferable to letting everyone have nukes.

They are only capable of killing unarmed women and children.

Indeed.

A piss poor, sanction ridden, 3rd World Iran was able to push their shit in with ease, despite Izrael having free access to an unlimited supply of the most advanced weapons on earth.

If it wasn't for US support, Iran would probably be able to take out Israel, regardless of who does or doesn't have nukes.

Iran doesn't need nukes to take out Israel. They need the US to get out of the way and let them do it.

Our government mass murdered Iraqis in 1991 over the Nurse Niraya lies.

Our government mass murdered Iraqis the second time over WMD lies.

Our government is comprised of sociopathic serial killers who should face Nuremberg type trials.

Every government in existence today is comprised of sociopathic serial killers.

None of them should have nukes.

A State has a right to disarm its citizens.

In theory, they would have that right, if it's a voluntary state, but none of the states in existence are obviously voluntary.

 

[Invisible Man]

The State wants a monopoly on the use of force.

But everyone, from individuals to sovereign nations, have a natural right to self defense.

When the State infringes on those rights, they have lost the moral high ground and are now operating outside the rule of law.

The law of the jungle.

The state never had any moral high ground. It was conceived in sin, and can only exist by outside the rule of law. The essence of the state is to be a subset of a population that is allowed to do what the rest of the population is not allowed to do. Once you take that foundation away, you don't have a state any more.